> Ruth 4:21 KAI SALMAN EGENNHSEN TON BOOZ KAI BOOZ EGENNESEN TON WBED
>
> Here we see Boaz taking the definite article as the subject of the
> first phrase in the accusative, but the second phrase which is joined
> by KAI, the definite article is dropped in the nominative. I am
> assuming it is because the words are joined by KAI that the definite
> article not needed. We know Boaz in the second phrase, is clearly the
> same as in the first phrase. Is the same grammatic format as John 1:1?

Steve,

Actually the LXX here reflects the grammatical structure of the hebrew,
right down conjunctions without the definite articles and objects with
the definite form. I don't see this as being any support for a
permissible interpretation of a form in a purely greek document. It
looks like apples and oranges to me.